January 2004
Organs — Good, Bad and Indifferent	Show Menu

Stephen Adams gives a personal view

In recent times there has been discussion on the POSI (Pipe Organ Society of Ireland) website about electronic organs, and additional stops via electronics. The question that started things was a comment about the desirability of adding electronic stops to pipe organs. It then digressed into the topic of electronic organs versus pipe organs.

Personally, I find that a good electronic is always better than a bad pipe organ. Conversely, I am of the opinion that a good pipe organ is beyond reproach. Never will an electronic substitute get anywhere near the inherent qualities of a well-proportioned and well-positioned pipe organ. Certainly none I've heard in this country. (The better brands of electronic organs, properly set up in good buoyant acoustics, can beguile under certain conditions, but only with certain stop combinations.)

So what, you may well ask, defines a good organ? And how many people actually know the difference? It's open to perception of course.

What made me uneasy about the POSI discussions was that somebody innocently described the innards of an organ as "pipes sitting on a soundboard" or similar. But there's a little more to it than just that.

A good organ needs many things — a suitable specification, a good acoustic, correct scaling of pipes, height if possible, It must blend within itself (good voicing), its internal mechanisms must work in harmony within themselves and be reliable. This is merely the start of a list of essential requirements.

Locally (Dublin), I can cite so many poor organs of the type that just work in a bland, unexciting and unmusical fashion. Take for example, the 1895 Conacher that I moved from Ballinrobe to Whitechurch in 1993. It immediately required its Great and Swell 8'-4'-2' choruses to be upgraded to produce enough tone. Prior to that it was truly poor. We also fitted a Twelfth on the Great, in place of the Dulciana, which was relocated to the Swell to create a Celeste, and have since revoiced the Oboe to something with colour. The Swell strings and 2' still require more work.

Basically, it was a bog-standard factory organ. A colleague calls such instruments "hymn-machines". Extremely well made, yes, and very reliable as a result, but had we left it the way it was, it would have been an aesthetic embarrassment — just like so many pipe organs.

Take the other extreme — a successful organ. I'll pick one that nobody living has done — the Conacher in Sandymount. It's stunningly gorgeous. Here however, the original Telford pipework was retained, and so the organ most likely received much tonal attention, probably largely on site (the best place).

There are so many poor pipe organs around: organs that do not blend; organs that do not perform. Aside from the standard factory organs (e.g. Ballinrobe), there are the hybrids out there that have been fiddled with. An example that some of you would know would be ... well, let's say, city centre. (When I say "hybrid" I do not refer to the modern implication of a mix of pipe and electronic.) The choruses do not have decent tone — they are puny and lifeless. But to add insult to injury, the organ possesses mixtures that sit on the chorus like oil on water — they're too bright and loud. The specification is unruly, with the Swell Oboe playable only from Manual 1 (Choir). Meanwhile the Swell has a 4' Clarinet or some such useless stop (useless for chorus work). The strings are thin, the flutes are watery, the mutations poor..... The impressive array of tabs soon gets whittled down to only a few usable combinations. The organ does not "work"; it doesn't gel. The superstructure to support additional stops doesn't exist. What aspires to something considerable on paper, quickly disappoints. And this is so typical.

I doubt it, but there may be readers that love that, or other such organs. I'm just not one of them. It's open to perception. There are then, of course, the products of that period in the '70s and '80s, whereby screaming mixtures topped flutes that cough and splutter, without any hint of musicianship. And reeds that snarl and rasp. Horrible, misguided fashion.

On the other hand, our feelings at Killaloe Cathedral were quite different. It was a condition of the work that we add a Great Mixture and Trumpet. This had implications down the line, and the supporting chorus received appropriate treatment, based on our observations in the UK and further afield. And not just the chorus that directly relates to the additional stops; no, everything. The organ must be integral in all manners. The Swell strings even required upgrading. The originals were so far below their optimum, and besides, did not meet the new criteria. Our many patient hours of preparation to the pipes paid off. It is an exciting result, musical, powerful without that unwelcome feeling of being forced, and indeed highly reliable.

In conclusion, I have no doubt that playing an organ where competency, care and integrity have been applied, is a wholly different ball game than what the average church organ provides. The sheer beauty a good pipe organ can reflect will never be matched, especially by a few circuit boards. The sales person may of course say otherwise.

HINTS & TIPS 1

Randal Henly

The ideas for a possible series of articles came to me recently when an organist friend was complaining about the size of the new hymn book, specifically referring to the fact that when placed on the music desk, it just won’t stay open where you want it. Very true — we all know that! My solution to the problem (two large bulldog clips kept at the organ) evoked the reply “That’s a great idea — you should publish it in Soundboard!”

There are surely lots of simple and neat ideas such as that that may not be universally known. Let us know about them. Don’t assume that your idea (whether originally your or not) is known to everyone. Let us hope we can do a regular series of “Hints & Tips”

<<Previous | Next >>